Honda Insight Forum banner

Put Dunlop Enasave on my Insight

11K views 19 replies 11 participants last post by  MetroMPG  
#1 ·
Ok, you can thank me for getting these into the Discount Tire computer.

Called about them and they were not listed, but I insisted that there was such a tire and convinced the clerk to call their distributor.

Two days later They called me and said that yes, there was such a tire (which of course I already knew) and that if I wanted a set, they would put them in the computer, to which I replied that I could not know if I wanted a set unless they could tell me how much they would cost.

Two days later and they were in the computer at $(OMG) $121 each.

I called the local Mitsubishi dealer and the said they could order the tire for $101 (tax not included) and install for an additional $10 each.

Back to Discount tire, and they agreed to match the price. Why does it have to be so hard?

Anyway, the RE 92s are only available special order though the web (Discount no longer lists them) and the Enasaves were $88, but about $44 to ship, so the difference was only going to be the sales tax, and for me, it was just worth the money to buy them from Discount and not have to fuss around with finding someone to install them and then either shipping them direct (though next time I think I will do this) or muscling them around.

Installed about a week ago. 04 CVT, and I am not a hyper-miler fanatic, though I do try to do a good job (Lifetime mileage is about 56 MPG and this is in Austin Tx where you have to run the A/C in the very long, very hot summers).

Old RE 92s were down to the wear bars, but it was the age as much as anything that made me want to replace them.

First impression. The Enesave if very quiet as compared to the REs.

Second impression, the Enesave is smoother.

Much of this might be just the fact that the tread is new and deep, but I flet it immediately, and I LIKE it!

I inflate to Honda factory spec (and was delighted to see that my Discount Tire dealer did too) so this was a pretty much A/B comparison.

After a week, just paying attention to the normal segments that I know very well, I really could not see any difference in the milege on the readout, and complete trips seemed to be pretty much exactly the same.

This tire was selected to run on the Mirage which is being heavily promoted as a high mileage car. My guess is that even a 3% difference might mean the difference between the car getting 42.9 MPG and 44.1 MPG which makes a 44 MPG car sound a lot better tha a 42 MPG car.

And I would also think that the RE-92s could have been "Saved" by the Mirage but that perhaps either the Dunlop was "As good" or "close enough".

While it is not listed as low rolling resistance, logically it makes sense that it is at least reduced over a standard tire and perhaps the delta is pretty small.

Anyway, it might take a year to know if there is a meaningful difference, and perhaps a true hyper-mile driver in a manual car will have a different outcome, but I am pretty happy with the Enasave.

So, should now show up in your local Discount Tire database, and call you local Mitsubishi dealer for a quote so you can go armed to Discount. They say they will match any local quote, and for the 15 years I have been dealing with this, they have always stood by this.

Hope someone finds this useful.
 
#3 ·
Well, be sure to see my qualifying statements. I am driving a CVT with no Lean Burn.

A 3 percent difference in fuel economy for me may be very difficult to see, but the minute you hit lean burn, it may be immediately apparent.

I am pretty comfortable recommending to a CVT driver as being pretty close to the REs, but a manual may just be a different game entirely.

I just have the gut feeling though that these are very similar to the REs. They were both likely "Developed" specifically for vehicles intended to be marketed as high mileage, and as these things to, tire technology upgrade is a cheap way to increase the fleet fuel economy.

The bad news is that if no other manufacture OEMs them, we can expect the prices to remain high. One of the downsides to having a niche vehicle I guess.
 
#4 · (Edited)
Good for you for trying these out. If anyone feels like digging deeper into the low rolling resistance versus non-low rolling resistance designation among the few different tire sizes, please do. The 165 size isn't listed as LRR at Tirerack, while the other sizes are... Maybe I'll just email tirerack...

[edit]
sent this email to Tirerack:
"The tirerack website discusses the Dunlop Enasave tire as an 'eco-friendly' tire, etc. But the 165-65/14 size isn't listed as low rolling resistance, LRR, while the other two sizes are. Can you tell me a bit about why this is the case, and what differences might be expected between LRR and not LRR for this brand/model tire? I belong to a community of first generation Honda Insight owners, which car uses a 165-65/14 size, and we're always looking for options beyond the Bridgestone Potenza RE92s - which are great tires but often hard to find/get and often seemingly on the brink of being discontinued..."

I'll post any replies...
 
#5 ·
Yesterday while we were doing a repair on an Insight at Scotts, we saw that the vehicle had new re92's on it. Checking further, the Mfg. date was 35/12.
Tire rack indicates the re92's are.......... in stock.

HTH
Willie
 
#6 · (Edited)
Yes, Tire Rack does indeed stock the RE 92s and they are only about $6 or $8 each more than the Enasave, which Tire Rack also carries.

But Discount Tire no longer lists the REs. To be fair, they did not list the Enasaves until I kind of forced the guy to follow up with the Dunlop distributor.

And the same might be true of the REs. Maybe with just some persitance, they could be made to get the REs.

The question as to wheter the REs are clearly superior is yet to be answered though, but until other people try them, we will not know, and at some point, I suspect the REs will go away for real. They are expensive, and if the only ones buying them are the Mirage and Insight owners (which is to really say, the Insight owners, because my bet is that Mirage owners will go with the less expensive tire at replacement time) then the clock is ticking on the REs until the few thousand active insights being driving by hyper milers expire (the cars, not the drivers. LOL).

But for my CVT, while not conclusive, I have not noticed any change in well traveled segment mileage or known trips. The small variations are well within the range of energy conservation ignorant driving habits of others interfering with my own ability to get maximum MPG.
 
#8 ·
After a week, just paying attention to the normal segments that I know very well, I really could not see any difference in the milege on the readout, and complete trips seemed to be pretty much exactly the same.
I've heard from multiple places before that tires will give better F/E after about 2000 miles as the wear. If that is a true then putting a new set of RE92s on should have had you seen a millage drop from the old RE92s. So the fact that you don't notice a hit may indicate that they will beat the RE92s once broken in.
 
#10 · (Edited)
....So the fact that you don't notice a hit [in mpg] may indicate that they will beat the RE92s once broken in.
You'd have to have more precise measurements than OP's slightly-greater-than-casual-observations to really tell the difference. Hopefully someone will take up the task...

FYI, as I mentioned on another thread, Tire Rack says the 165-14 size IS LRR, that they made some error when they posted info... It now says "LRR," but interestingly, the max inflation pressure is different than the others (44 vs. 51), they're made in Thailand rather than Japan, and website has no revs per mile info, still...
 
#9 ·
All tires have to be "Broken In".
A few hundred miles of "aggresive" driving should do it.
Drive like grandma and 2K sounds about right.

NASCAR "breaks" all their tires in a few laps.
My Opinion.
Willie
 
#13 ·
I hypermile my CVT as much as i can, and with a new set of 92's put on 1 month ago, saw no difference in MPG. was 62.2 last tank @600 miles, 62.0 this tank at 590 miles. same commute, same speeds.

thats the actual as calculated from the pump at fillup, not the computer (computer claimed 63.4 and 62.8)

will post more if i find a set for my 5spd, as its gettin 77mpg on some seriously old 92's and it is a lot more sensitive to changes in friction and weight.